Where are the credentialed scientists who don't believe that man is responsible for global warming?

Question

Please don't tell me to "do my own research" I have to the best of my ability. This isn't a dig. I am truly interested in hearing from other viewpoints than my own as long as they are truly believable sources. And to the one, every name that I can find turns out to be funded by front groups for oil companies, energy companies, conservative think tanks etc.

Find me a true scientist credentialed in climatology that doesn't believe that we are responsible for Global warming who ISNT funded by a neo-conservative think tank such as the Heritage foundation.

I want their names, credentials,links to peer-reviewed papers, and most importantly funding sources for their studies.

Answer 1

Let me say right away that I really don't know the names of reputable scientists who are for or against the idea that we are causing global warming with our activities. I just know that the ones who seem to come out against it seem to have a heavy poltitcal agenda. I notice the people who responded who claim to have some scientific credentials (I have a PhD in chemistry, so that don't mean squat for climatology) won't reveal their names. In my local paper recently there was a rabid letter about how all the pseudoscientific types are lying and there is no such thing as global warming. The reference was given to an Oregon location that turned out to be run by one retired scientist who has compiled a list of "scientists" who say that human caused global warming is a scam. The list of scientists was composed by asking people to sign a petition of sorts and to "truthfully" give their scientific credentials. A search of the names turns up such legendary scientists as Hawkeye Pierce and B.J.Hunnicut of MASH fame. I wish I could give you some good references, but about all I know is to google global warming and see what you come up with.

Answer 2

One problem with global warming is most of people who comment on it don't know enough to make an informed decision.

Many skeptics are vehemently opposed to the idea that global warming is occuring but are unable to produce any evidence to support their beleifs. You'll doubtless be aware from your own research that the arguments used by the skeptics are fundementally flawed.

To the best of my knowledge there are no climatologists (or similar) who do not beleive in global warming. If there are then I've neither met them nor heard about them. After 24 years involved with climatology in one way or another I think it's fair to say I'd have at least heard of them.

Your research has led to the only possible conclusion - there are no climatologists who dispute global warming. There is dispute as to just what's caused it, how to resolve it, what will happen in the future et al but not to the fact it's happening.

In your research you may have come across reference to two petitions signed by scientists to support the case against global warming. One such petition exists but is nothing to do with global warming, the words 'global warming' don't even appear anywhere in the text (if I could recall what it was called I'd reference it).

The other petition is one signed by an alleged 17,000+ scientists of which 2,600 are supposedly "physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, meteorologists, oceanographers, and environmental scientists". http://www.oism.org/pproject/a_sci.htm

There's only one thing wrong with this petition - everything. For a start, it's the work of Dr Frederick Seitz, the same Dr Seitz that was employed by the tobacco industry to dispute the hazards of cigarette smoking and to this day still disputes the hazards of smoking. After having failed spectacularly to convince the world that smoking is safe it appears he's now turned his attention to disputing global warming. I'm sure the fact that he's a director of one oil company and major shareholder in another really has nothing to do with it.

Another problem with the petition are the people who've signed it. From the research I've done many of them don't seem to exist and the so called 'experts' often turn out to be accountants, mechanics and others with no climatological or meteorological credentials. Click the link above and Google some of the names yourself, you might want to Google Dr Seitz as well.

A few years ago you may have found a "scientist credentialed in climatology..." who was of the opinion that global warming was a natural phenomena but in recent years even the most die-hard fundementalists have come to accept that humans are at least partially responsible.

Your quest, I fear, is leading you down a blind alley. However, should you turn up such a person I would be most interested to know who they are.

Answer 3

As a geologist and environmental consultant, I don't believe that global warming is from human causes. I am not going to give you my credentials for obvious reasons. I find it interesting that you are not interested in checking the credentials of Al Gore or the many bought and paid scientists pushing global warming. Human induced global warming is a political not scientific phenomena. By far, much more money goes into promoting global warming. If you do not promote global warming, you are far more likely to lose your funding and you will be ridiculed by the likes of some of earlier posters. A little knowledge can be dangerous and they have very little. If you are looking for bias, look in a mirror.

Answer 4

properly it has now been desperate why the variety of scientists helping AGW is shrinking and those adversarial is turning out to be. it variety of feels everytime a scientist tries to fairly make advantageous Mann/Hansen with the help of scientific technique they swap aspects and alter into skeptics as a results of fact not one of the numbers check out. additionally extra advantageous than 2/3rds of those whose names have been linked to the IPCC launch have already reported they weren't consulted related to the content cloth or conclusions of the launch. in actuality it variety of feels decrease than a dozen persons have been in charge for that record and something for sure say they won't and could no longer help the conclusions reached with the help of the small team headed with the help of Hansen that wrote the tip. So it variety of feels that the full IPCC record has possibly a dozen supporters and a minimum of three,000 who state that its conclusions do no longer try out as a provable thought no longer to show actuality as some right here could have us have faith. Oh they call themselves dissenters and their opinion a dissenting one and from the numbers the dissenting opinion is the standard public one on the same time as the respected one is extremely plenty a minority one!

Answer 5

We are not responsible for global warming and actually there is nothing we can do to stop global warming. We've been through several cycles of glaciation and subsequent melting in the last few million years (about every 40,000 to 100,000 years, driven by Earth's orbital cycles). The last ice age ended about 10,000 years ago so we are in the early inter-glacial phase now (recently the frequency of glaciation has been closer to 100,000 yrs) with significant polar ice and glaciers remaining. Sea-level has been significantly higher during past interglacials than it is currently, so further warming and melting is definitely expected over the next 10 or 20,000 years whether we contribute to it or not. Of course, our contributions of greenhouse gases may speed things up a bit, that remains to be seen. One interesting note though: 2 major volcanic eruptions alone (on the scale of Krakatoa or Vesuvius) contribute more greenhouse gases (CO2 mainly) to the atmosphere than all of human contributions throughout history so far. Fortunately, it gets reabsorbed in the oceans and much of it is eventually precipitated as carbonates.

Conservation and clean, renewable, alternative energy sources are definitely the way to go though, regardless of whether our fossil fuel use has an impact on the rate of warming, and the sooner the better. I, for one, simply don't care much for breathing polluted air.

Answer 6

We can not say as yet that Man is responsible for global warming. Global warming is a fact today but we cannot blame man entirely for it.
Before man came in this theatre, earth has experienced global warming as well as cooling severl times.
Even before the modern man came in existence, the planet earth has had 3-4 global warming episodes (inter-glacial).We do not know with certainity as yet whether we are living in the inter-glacial period with low period peaks of warming and cooling or the inter-glacial period is coming to an end and the glacial period is at the horizon.
So pl. do not jump to a conclusion..
We are just 2 million years old on this planet and the atmospheric circulation and climatic changes have been here much before life forms could cretae niche here some 1500 million years from today.
We need to worry for the climatic changes, no doubt about it.

Answer 7

Go to the websites and read the book given in the references. You will find many references and links to references. Start by reading the works of Fred Singer and Pat Michaels, both at the University of Virginia.

Answer 8

And just below the ones with perpetual motion machines.

Answer 9

They're right next door to the scientists who think smoking is good for you.